Treating Religiosity

[Suave]

I'm not an attention craving type of person. But notice how when one angle wasn't working for him, GH switched tracks and tried to make this a thread about me. Should I be flattered ? Nah, he would've done the same with anybody.

[GRUNHERZ]

Thats a good dodge of the question Suave, ironically in a post about you critizing others for apparently changinfg subjects..

[Shuckins]

Suave,

Your statements have called your motives into question.  You have no one to blame but yourself...

"Religion is of course the abandonment of rationality.  The reason to fear fanaticism, which is what religion is, is that most of the world's suffering can be traced back to it."

These statements can be interpreted as either inflammatory or subjective.

Nash...I found the scientific report amusing...not offensive...because to me it represented a form of junk science.  As I said earlier, some of its conclusions were spurious at best.


Glad you're in touch with your spiritual side:D

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Suave
Shuckings I asume you're responding to me, but if you'll look carefully you'll notice that what you are responding to is actually a quote from an article copied from a different web address. Not something that I wrote.

Religiosity in temporal lobe epileptics is a fact. And now people are able to replicate this with temporal lobe disruption. I find it very fascinating, particularly Dr.Ramachandran's work. Don't you want to know what causes religion?

And here in the last line you hint at your motives for this thread. Linking widespread human trait of religion to a study of mental illness..

To put into plain terms:

Suave belives that we will find the cause of religious beliefs in 90% of the human population by studying the tiny proportion of peope suffering from mental illness.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Suave
But notice how when one angle wasn't working for him, GH switched tracks and tried to make this a thread about me.

Oh... I saw that the very second it happened. I'm personally, uhm...  well lets just say that I've seen it a few times before.

[Nash]

Originally posted by Shuckins
Nash...I found the scientific report amusing...not offensive...because to me it represented a form of junk science.  

I'm by no means the scientific type. I suck at science. I did like what this particular experiment produced. To me, it was an affirmation.

But... What was wrong with the science of it? (I'd never be able to figure it out).

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Nash
Oh... I saw that the very second it happened. I'm personally, uhm...  well lets just say that I've seen it a few times before.

I disagree, his wider beliefs and statements on the sublect are valid discussion topics.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Nash
I'm by no means the scientific type. I suck at science. I did like what this particular experiment produced. To me, it was an affirmation.

But... What was wrong with the science of it? (I'd never be able to figure it out).

Wanna know one problem?  

This study focuses on mentally ill people who are obssesd with religion and then draws wider conclusions about the orgiins of religion in general, note the rumor mongering about St Paul baing mentally ill.  From there, for the willing,  its but a short jump to clonclude that his experience meeting the risen jesus on the road to damascus was but an epileptic fit...

But I ask what of thev mentally ill people who obssess about or react strongly in phyically measurable way about other things? Like dogs, or cars, or loud noises, certain images etc..  Why the curious focus on just the mentally ill obessed with religion..

[Suave]

Isn't almost everything you say for the sake of argument?

My basic argument? I don't have one, this isn't a contest. I know you want to start one, but I think you should find a healthier outlet for you anger. One that doesn't repulse people from serious conversation with you.

You're not my patient Grun, and I'm not getting paid to listen to you. I'm sorry it had to come to this, but you really went out of your way, so I have to believe that on some level it's what you wanted.

And yes, as I've allready clearly stated in this thread, I believe like the founding fathers of this country, that religion is the source of a great many of the evils that plague mankind. However I would expand on that and state that fanatacism period, not just religion is the source.  Am I extraordinary because I have never understood or felt the seduction of fanatacism? Possibly, but I doubt it.

[Shuckins]

Nash,

It was the statement made in the report that since certain types of epilepsy are accompanied by hyperreligiosity St. Paul must have been an epileptic.

That statement has no basis in provable fact, since St. Paul is not available for medical examination.  One has to wonder at the motives of a scientist who would make such a statement in a supposedly "objective" scientific report.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Shuckins
Nash,

It was the statement made in the report that since certain types of epilepsy are accompanied by hyperreligiosity St. Paul must have been an epileptic.

That statement has no basis in provable fact, since St. Paul is not available for medical examination.  One has to wonder at the motives of a scientist who would make such a statement in a supposedly "objective" scientific report.

Yep excatly what i said.

[Lazerus]

Originally posted by Suave
Lazerus can you think of something that is immoral that is not antisocial and vice versa?

I sit in my chair in front of my computer and don't talk to anybody. That's antisocial.

I sit in my chair in front of my computer and upload child pornography to distribute throughout the world. That's immoral.

Basically immorality as I see it is doing something that hurts others, yourself, or society.

Exactly. Immorality and antisocialism do not equate.

And you might say that they are not truely religious, but what matters is that they identify themselves as religious.

I can identify myself as anything I want to, it does make that identification true.

It appears to me that you have a bigotry towards religion in general.

Of course, I could be wrong, but that's the impression that two pages of posts from you on this subject has left me with.

[Shuckins]

As fascinating as all this is, I gotta go to bed now.  Have to teach Sunday School in the morning.  

Take Care, Nash and Grun and Suave

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Suave


My basic argument? I don't have one

FOLLOWED BY, YOU GUESSED IT, AN ARGUMENT:

And yes, as I've allready clearly stated in this thread, I believe like the founding fathers of this country, that religion is the source of a great many of the evils that plague mankind. However I would expand on that and state that fanatacism period, not just religion is the source.  Am I extraordinary because I have never understood or felt the seduction of fanatacism? Possibly, but I doubt it.

Definition of "argument" from here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=argument

   1. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life.
   2. A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying a house now.
   3. A set of statements in which one follows logically as a conclusion from the others.


Why the silly semantics suave?

BTW I looove the rest of your post, yiu have a great tendancy to suggest people who dont share your religious or other views are somehow mentally abnormal!

Awesome!

[Suave]

Well since you have some geniune questions about the topic. People with temporal lobe epilepsy aren't mentally ill. But it was realised that one thing they all had in common was emotional regligiousity, peaking imidietly post siezure. We know that different parts of the brain are responsible for different things anger, maternal love etc. Anyway, they are able to reproduce emotional religious experiences in people who don't have TLE by tinkering with that particular part of the brain.